CANTON – A Sioux Falls couple that built a home in the McKennan Park neighborhood that does not comply with historic standards has six weeks to submit plans to renovate the house, a circuit court judge ruled Friday.

“I’m going to give them six weeks to go ahead and get those plans for renovation submitted to the Sioux Falls Board of Historic Preservation,” Judge John Pekas said.

Pekas was responding to a motion from Barbara and Pierce McDowell, demanding that neighbors Sarah and Joseph Sapienza bring their house into compliance with Pekas’ 2016 ruling. The South Dakota Supreme Court earlier this year upheld Pekas’ ruling that the home did not comply with historic district regulations because it was 8 and a half feet taller than regulations allowed.

Dick Travis, a lawyer representing the Sapienzas, asked for as long as eight weeks, saying he thought the Sapienzas could get the plans submitted in time for the Board of Historic Preservation’s May meeting.

McKennan Park home owners Josh and Sarah Sapienza sort through documents while architect Spencer Ruff talks to the Sioux Falls Board of Historic Preservation about how their home does not comply with national historic standards Wednesday, May 9, at Carnegie Town Hall in Sioux Falls. Briana Sanchez / Argus Leader

Pierce McDowell, center, listens to Lawyer Steve Johnson explain the issues Pierce and his wife Barbara have with the neighboring McKennan Park home that does not comply with national historic standards during a meeting with the Sioux Falls Board of Historic Preservation Wednesday, May 9, at Carnegie Town Hall in Sioux Falls. Briana Sanchez / Argus Leader

But the arguments Friday hinted at more strife between the neighbors when those plans are submitted. Scott Abdallah, a lawyer representing the McDowells, argued that the board needed to review not just the height of the roof, but 11 other standards that are part of historic district regulations. Those include the size of the house, its mass related to other structures in the neighborhood, and its location to the McDowell residence.

Abdallah argued that the Board of Historic Preservation did not approve the home that the Sapienzas eventually built.

“This isn’t as simple as saying we’re just going to lower the roof 8 and half feet and we’re done,” Abdallah said.

Abdallah argued for a 14-day deadline for the Sapienzas to determine whether they intended to tear down the house or renovate it compliant to all historical standards, followed by six weeks to begin the process. He noted that the case had gone on for nearly three years.

"The neighborhood has endured enough," he said.

"The time has finally come for the defendants to take immediate action and satisfy the judgment against them," he added.

Pekas noted that during the trial, it was apparent that city officials were unaware of the historic district standards, and he ordered Travis to make sure that the city communicate with the Board of Historic Preservation what those standards are.

"There seemed to be a gap there," he said. "We want to make sure we bridge that gap."

Pekas had ruled that the city of Sioux Falls shared culpability with the home's construction because the city had issued a building permit that not only failed to comply with historic standards, but was allowed to be built so close to the McDowell home that the McDowells lost the use of a wood burning fireplace. But the Supreme Court reversed that part of Pekas' ruling, arguing the city didn't have a duty to the McDowells.